No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Economic, Environmental and Energy Use Implications of Short-Season Cotton Production: Texas Lower Rio Grande Valley*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 April 2015
Extract
Quantities of insecticides used per acre by cotton producers in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas are among the nation's highest. This is due to the presence of many different insect pests and especially to their increasing tolerance to insecticides. As insects become resistant to insecticides, farmers tend to increase the number of insecticide applications, further compounding the problem. Even using large amounts of insecticides, control of damaging insects has been unsatisfactory.
Typically, a long-season cotton variety, requiring a 160 to 180 day season, is grown. Because the probability of rainfall is much greater in August than in July [4], most harvesting can be expected in August.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1975
Footnotes
*
Technical Article No. 11498 of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. This publication was supported in part by the National Science Foundation and Environmental Protection Agency, through a grant (NSF GB-34718) to the University of California. The work was in cooperation with ARS-U.S. Department of Agriculture and funded in part under USDA Cooperative Agreement Number 12-14-100-11, 194(33). The findings, opinions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the University of California, the National Science Foundation or the Environmental Protection Agency. Use of a brand name does not infer endorsement of a product by the Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas Agricultural Extension Service of U.S. Department of Agriculture. Further naming specific pesticides is not to be interpreted as authors' recommendation for their use.
References
[1]
Bradshears, Alan D., Kirk, I. W. and Hudspeth, E. B. Jr. “Effects of Close-Row Spacing and Plant Population on Double-Row Cotton,” Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, MP-872, February 1968.Google Scholar
[2]
Casey, James E., Lacewell, Ronald D. and Winfield, Sterling. “An Example of Economically Feasible Opportunities for Reducing Pesticide Use in Commercial Agriculture,” Journal of Environmental Quality, in press.Google Scholar
[3]
Casey, James E., Lacewell, Ronald D. and Winfield, Sterling. “Economic and Environmental Implications of Cotton Production Under A New Cotton Pest Management System,” Texas Agricultural Experiment Station MP-1152, August 1974.Google Scholar
[4]
Frisbie, , Ray, , Roy, Parker, Roger, Bradshaw, Bill, Buxkemper, Bill, Bagley and John, Norman. “Texas Pest Management Annual Report, 1973,” Texas Agricultural Extension Service, 1973.Google Scholar
[5]
Kirk, I. W., Bradshaw, A. D. and Hudspeth, E. B. Jr. “Influence of Row Width and Plant Spacing on Cotton Production Characteristics on the High Plains,” Texas Agricultural Experiment Station MP-937, December 1969.Google Scholar
[6]
Lacewell, Ronald D., Bottrell, D. G., Billingsley, Ray V., Rummel, D. R. and Larson, James L.. “Texas High Plains Reproductive-Diapause Boll Weevil Control Program: Preliminary Estimate of Impact,” Texas Agricultural Experiment Station MP-1165, December 1974.Google Scholar
[7]
Lacewell, Ronald D., Larson, James L., Rummel, D. G. and Billingsley, Ray V.. “Economic Implications of Discontinuing the Texas High Plains Boll Weevil Suppression Program,” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 6, No. 2, December 1974, 33–40.Google Scholar
[8]
Namken, L. N. and Heilman, M. D.. “Determinate Cotton Cultivars for More Efficient Cotton Production in the Lower Rio Grande Valley,” Agronomy Journal, 65: 953–956, 1973.Google Scholar
[9]
Pimentel, D., Hurd, L. D., Bellotti, A. C., Forster, M. J., I. N. Oka, , Sholes, O. D. and Whitman, R. J.. “Foot Production and the Energy Crisis,” Science, 182: 443–449, 1973.Google Scholar
[10]
Ray, L. L., and Hudspeth, E. B.. “Narrow Row Cotton Production,” Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Current Research Report No. 66-5, TA-5564, September 1966.Google Scholar
[11]
Sterling, Winfield and Haney, Robert L.. “1973 Cotton Yields Climb, Costs Drop Through Pest Management Systems,” Texas Agricultural Progress, 19: pp. 4–7.Google Scholar
[12]
Texas Agricultural Extension Service. “Texas Crop Budgets,” Texas A&M University, MP-1024, 1974.Google Scholar
[13]
Texas Department of Agriculture. “Texas Cotton Statistics,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting Service, 1973.Google Scholar
[14]
Walker, Rodney L. and Kletke, Darrel D.. “The Application and Use of the Oklahoma State University Crop and Livestock Budget Generator,” Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Report P-663, July 1972.Google Scholar
[15]
Wanjura, D. F. and Hudspeth, E. B. Jr. “Effects of Close Row Spacing on Cotton Yields on the Texas High Plains,” Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Progress Report—2266, March 1963.Google Scholar
[16]
Willett, Gayle S., Taylor, B. Brooks, and Buxton, Dwayne R.. “An Economic Comparison of Short and Full Season Cotton Production in Arizona,” Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Report No. 269, August 1973.Google Scholar